Jump to content

Olle Petersson

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Olle Petersson

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 10/19/1969

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ


  • Location
    Sundsvall, Sweden
  • Interests
    Games, science, technology, ...
  • Occupation
    M Sc Biotechnical engineering
  1. Your point being? Having your M1s knocked out is by no means impossible. The M1s just have better odds in a duel situation, since it usually takes more hits for a T-72 to knock out an M1 than the other way around. Anybody with experience from professional simulators can tell you that... Cheers Olle
  2. My take on the issues... ... but reading briefings that look like they've been written by a 1930-ies typewriter on cheap wartime paper is cool! That's the general impression i currently get when reading the briefings, provided they're well written. It's allready there in the form of colour coding for armour and penetration as well as direct info (hit percentage and kill probability) through the LOS/target tool. Which you do have! In the units listing just point on an item to get the vital statistics in the lower left corner. When those data are the same, you can also get some clue t
  3. No, it isn't. It's your legal right to have one backup at a time, but the ability to make that backup isn't guaranteed by the law. You are, for example, not allowed to bypass any technical copy protection. Yeah, Swedish law isn't very smart in this respect... PDF manuals rule! ... provided they're properly designed for online reading, with hyperlinks and a generally suitable layout. In my work I sometimes have to fix some advanced defibrillators, and the service manual is a PDF. Troubleshooting and the following instructions how to do work like charm! Links all over that take me straigh
  4. Thread hijacking here... Trench or foxhole? When setting up a defence I generally have the option. A test I made came to the conclusion that when approaching dug in stationary troops that are neither "hiding" nor shooting you'll spot, in order: 1) Trenches. 2) Foxholes. 3) Troops in foxholes. 4) Troops in trenches. If the terrain is other than open the spotting distance will be very short for the last two, but well beyond 100m to spot a trench. The trench provide very good cover for troops as well as the concealment, on the other hand it's quite easy for an attacker to spray the t
  5. What makes me slightly upset is the poor (wrong!) use of the word "boresighted" in CM. The actual (real life) meaning of the word is that the aim and hit points coincide at that distance. Since the gun sight normally is positioned at the side of the barrel there will be a slight offset between the line of aim (sight) and the line of fire. When boresighting the line of aim (not adjusted for distance) is set to coincide with the central line through the barrel at some range, typically half of max range but can be done at any range. Thereby the gun barrel won't point in a significantly diffe
  6. Wow, this stirred up some heat (and confusion)... I'll try to respond to some of it, most of which has been covered in the thread I linked before. Depends on how it's used. What's done with dongle protection is that parts of the executable is encrypted, so it can't run as is. The dongle contains decryption hardware that, given a valid license, decrypts the executable. To crack it somebody has to decrypt the file and re-code it. That is possible to do but requires a lot of time and effort. Not worth it for "cheap" software. Earlier it was also common to have the same parts of the ex
  7. I think that's mostly post WW2. Rather from 60:ies on. For a "semi-meeting" engagement you can have a scenario with a strategically important (victory) location near the centre of the map. Player A start with a small force (platoon-ish) defending the VL, while Player B start in full force (2 companies+) near his map edge. Both players know A will receive reinforcements from his map edge, starting a couple of turns later. Player B better control the VL before A's reinforcements get there. Cheers Olle
  8. There's been some serious discussion about how to protect the upcoming release of Steel Beasts from piracy, and that discussion together with the modular system intended for CMx2 make me just think: Dongle! Dongle protection seems to be just right for CMx2, at least for those of us that are likely to buy more than one module. The only known downside with a dongle is that the hardware costs from 40$ and up, depending on model. You don't need more than one though, and with dongle protection the software can be distributed simply as easy access downloads and/or on disks without copy protect
  9. Regarding crunch times; I played CMBO with crunch times well above five minutes, if gun fire was heavy. (P2/300MHz/64MB RAM) A one minute cruch time for a medium size battle computed on a state of the art computer seems playable, with crunch times doubled or quadrupled on lesser hardware. (Anything less than five minutes is fine with me.) /Olle
  10. So what, more precisely, is the BoF battlefield? And why shouldn't AFV tactics be an issue when AFVs are exactly what you, as the player, use in BoF? (For SB the battlefield is not urban, but just about anything else, in my experience.) I can agree with that. To some extent BoF is more realistic in that aspect. All can be adjusted to your liking.</font>
  11. But what about other units? If the AI can't drive my vehicle (effectively) it shouldn't be able to rive any other vehicle in the game either! "Move to waypoint" must be one of the single most common commands in the game, and the AI can't handle it! :mad: And if, as I assume, I am to control (command) more than one vehicle at a time, then a crappy AI makes matters a lot worse... I agree that it seems pretty good. The problem (for me) is that the competition from another small developer is so much better! Although this game have many features I really appreciate... - The ability to di
  12. This post really taught me some new things... Not to forget the Italian 45mm mortars. Very common! ... in either way: - It has very few rounds and a long response time, so compared to lighter artillery it's more likely to not hit anything essential. - It's very expensive, so if it doesn't do lot's of damage to the opposition the user is in trouble! British 2" mortars have a minimum range of 0m, so these can be used, even in a very foggy night. Early on they get the StuG III (with 75mm gun), which in various versions was used throughout the war. Later on they got the StuH 42 with
  13. Just compare what a field with an armoured infantry battalion, located some three miles away, look like in those games, and let's then discuss the graphics. I have no experience whatsoever with Far Cry and Joint Ops, but in BF2 you can see exactly nothing beyond 450m (and very little beyond 400m)! That's a non starter for a tank sim where engagement ranges go beyond 4000m. There simply must be some drop in eye-candy if you are to have a large piece of terrain with lots of units in it in view all at once! To comment on the demo in general; I don't really like it either. It just doesn't
  14. I agree! It should! ... but it doesn't! Some snippets: "- B - release mountain brake," What the **** is a "mountain brake"? In the game it seems to work like a regular parking brake, but this one is to stop mountains from moving, or what? "- B and N keys - select ammunition type;" The keys turn a knob to a new position, but it doesn't help me understand the abbreviations (in Russian spelling with Latin letters) for the different ammo types. It says nothing about the gun sight and the heap of other stuff you need to know "to use the tank controls in the demo correctly". /Olle
  15. 1500m what? Maximum LRF range? If so that seems waaay strange when you're supposed to fire sabot and HEAT rounds at targets twice that far away... Cheers Olle
  • Create New...